Racism is a Mirror: It Works Both Ways

It seems my recent post, “How Did I Miss It?,” has struck a chord with a black friend of mine. He has sent me several private emails expressing his disappointment in me. He seems to think I am wrong, my argument is totally unsupported and that I have absolutely no understanding of what racism really is. I think this is important enough to address because I know it is my friend who is wrong about this issue.
First, let’s look at what the dictionary has to say about the definition of racism:

 

Definition of RACISM

 
1: a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race

 

Now, if this is the definition you assign to the term ‘racism,’ this discussion is over: this defines something that is most often an inherent character trait of an individual, and we can neither legislate it, nor lay a moral claim to have the authority to legislate it. It would be like trying to control who someone hates and punishing them accordingly, or to legislate what someone believes about anything. In fact, if we get right down to it, the right to be racist in this sense is protected by the first amendment as it is a matter of free will and/or conscience.

 
This would confine this definition to the individual, and I have always considered racism – real racism – to be a matter of officially sanctioned policy: either by a society at large or through its government. For this reason, I have always preferred to think of racism in the sense of the dictionary definition above as prejudice or bigotry, and I have always considered racism to include some form of official policy that applies to all of society. This is the form of racism this nation struggled with over both the issue of slavery as well as civil rights after the Civil War, and this is the definition I use when discussing the term.

 
Now, assuming you will agree with my definition – even if only for the sake of this discussion – let’s address the issue of racism in this nation. Today, we have a term known as ‘affirmative action.’ Define it how you will, but this is an official policy, enacted and protected by law, that discriminates in favor of one racial status at the expense of another. By my definition or the dictionary’s, this is racism. This is also where we get the term ‘reverse racism.’ There is no such thing as reverse racism; there is only racism.

 
But our society has been told – especially by our college professors and supposed civil rights leaders – that it is not possible for a minority to be racist. The claim is that only whites can be racist, or if they are being generous, they will tell you only the race in power can be racist. OK, set aside that this is not true, let’s look at who is in power today: a black man. So, using this definition, and the fact that Obama has directed the DOJ not to prosecute or pursue blacks who violate the law, we have the requirements for my definition and that of the dictionary – only this time, it is black-on-white racism. There is ample evidence for this. Obama has made many comments that, had they been said by a white man about blacks, would have had him labeled a racist. He has ignored clear race/hate crimes by groups such as the New Black Panthers. And his allies in the media have ignored black-on-white hate crimes while manufacturing white-on-black crimes from a Hispanic-black incident. In the Martin-Zimmerman case, the media falsified evidence to create this story, and Obama ran with it. Yet, when a white man was beaten by blacks claiming it was for Martin, Obama made no attempt to console the family or speak out against the attack. This couldn’t be any clearer: we have – in Obama – everything blacks have told us for decades is an indication of racism – except for one thing. Obama is not white.

 
Now, I have no doubt that I will be called a racist for even posti8ng this, but it isn’t true. Heck, I was raised on the border of French Quebec. If you don’t know what that means, then you might not know as much about the history of blacks in North America as you might think. I still hold the prevailing racial views of the region in which I grew up, so I reject any and all claims of racism that people try to make against me. I recognize them for what they are: an attempt to use race as a weapon. Unfortunately, that is what race has become in our society today: a weapon. It is used to silence descent and to extort all sorts of money or favoritism on behalf of minorities – mostly blacks. Jackson and Sharpton have made careers out of doing just this, as have many politicians. And now, it is institutionally supported by our government. Well, I have a little news flash for people who support these racist programs because they believe they are making up for wrongs of the past: THIS IS UNCONSTUTIONAL!

 
Our Constitution prohibits our government from holding the children accountable for the crimes of their parents (this is called a blood law). There is no one alive today who owned slaves or took part in the slave trade dating from the founding of this nation. Nor are there any former slaves alive today. So the claims of reparations may sound good, but they are nothing more than unconstitutional attempts at extortion. And where the government has instituted such policies, they amount to extortion and theft. I often wonder, how many of us even stop to think about how many whites are punished over our slave history, yet their families were not even in this nation when slavery was still going on? Or how many blacks ever stop to ask whether they are harming a white family whose ancestors died trying to free the slaves? That these issues are never mentioned actually supports my claim: the fight over racism today is more about power than right or wrong.

 
Finally, I have one other thought. If you turn a person’s government against him based on the color of his skin, at what point does he become you and you take his place? You see, racism is about skin color: it has nothing to do with which race is the majority in society. If this were the case, South Africa was never a racist nation as whites have always been in the minority. So, at what point do blacks in our society start to become the oppressors, and whites the oppressed? And when we reach that point, then don’t all the arguments blacks have made to justify ‘black rage’ suddenly stop working for them and start to be legitimate for whites, instead? If you are honest with yourself, you will realize I have a point here. You may even be hard pressed to decide whether or not we’ve reached that point yet.

 
I’ll leave you to decide on all of this for yourself. All I know is my friend is wrong on many, many levels. We are in no way, shape or form living in a pre-1960’s America, and racism is no longer institutionalized against blacks. If anything, it is now institutionalized against whites. But this is an issue that must be addressed honestly and fairly or we run the risk of creating a backlash. Unfortunately, I have become convinced a backlash is exactly what Obama wants because it will present him with the crisis he seeks to ‘do things he wouldn’t normally be able to do.”

62 thoughts on “Racism is a Mirror: It Works Both Ways

  1. I just reached this discussion in the psychology book I’ve been slowly reading through. The chapter deals with not only prejudice and bigotry, but also with male chauvinism.

    Of course, this book was written by a left leaning person so perhaps some of his theories are skewed that way. 😉

    • When your lively hood depends on fighting some sort of perceived injustice, everything starts to look like oppression (yep, stole that from ‘if all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.’)

  2. NOTE: My friend tells me I am still wrong about this issue because I have presented no facts. All I can say to this is: if a person cannot see the signs of black-on-white racism in our society today, I could no more prove to them that gravity exists: they will only see what they want to.

    The shame of it is, this makes my friend part of the problem, and on the flip side of the same coin. 😦

  3. “I think this is important enough to address because I know it is my friend who is wrong about this issue.”

    You’re somethin! I don’t blame your friend one damn bit! Look how the hello you start your post! While I agree with much of your argument, I would very much like to hear his.

    • You pretty much have it: there is no black-to-white racism in America, and the Obama administration is showing no signs of it. Oh, and I have no – ZERO – evidence to support my assertions. That is pretty much his argument in a nut shell.

      He has bought into this idea that whites can’t know what racism is or understand it from the black perspective (convenient, huh?) and that it is not possible to have black-to-white racism: it can only exist white-to-black. He also says that white-to-black racism is still an American institution.

      In the 2+ years I’ve known him, he has NEVER acknowledged anything in the other direction – not once.

      I’m sorry, but he is wrong. No one who has been reading my recent posts can honestly claim I have NO support for my assertions. No one who HONESTLY looks at the social statistics of black success in this nation can say this (mind you, this means blacks who graduate school, get married and hold jobs do well – look it up). No one can deny the social barriers have been crossed (look at the number of black super stars, pop and cultural icons and incredibly rich and professionally successful persons in America now – and even in the White House). Yet he tells me there is NO evidence of racism against whites – after I have listed so many examples of it?!?

      Besides, Kells, he has and I assume is still reading this. Tell him to speak up if he disagrees with my take on this. But I bet he won’t, and if he does, he’d better be prepared to defend against the avalanche of examples of open racism against whites in this nation – including from our govt. and even Obama.

      • There is racism on both sides. There is racism within races. I’ve said many times but Black ignores that to try and make his point. So by him saying that I’ve never acknowledged anything in the other direction, makes him a liar. Yes, a liar. Because he is pointing out instances that he feels is racist and I don’t agree that they are, he thinks that’s denial the blacks can be racist. Nothing is further from the truth and I’ve given many examples. Yes, black3, I’m putting you on blast.

        I’ve said many of the lighter skinned blacks feel superior to the darker skinned ones. That’s RACISM within what is referred to as sub-races. I once wrote about playing wide receiver on my football team. A white kid lined up to cover me and I instantly thought, “there’s no way this white boy can cover me.” I thought I was a superior athlete because I was black and he was white. Guess what that is Black: All together now let’s say it: RACISM! Plus I was wrong. He was as fast or even faster than I was. That’s 1 point for the Black >White racism team.

        Saying “nigger” doesn’t make one racist. That’s a descriptive term. Now if one only believe’s that that term applies to a certain race then that is what class? RACISM! Honkey describes the white guys that came to the black parts of town to pick up black prostitutes. They would drive to a point that they felt safe and then honked their horns. Did u know that black? Cracker is a term that originated from the slaveowners that beat there slaves. The sounding of the whip cracking. Hence the work, “cracker”.

        Is George Zimmerman racist? Hell, I have no idea. What he did was PROFILE a person according to a certain group of attributes and race was one of them. That doesn’t make a person racist. Since the past break-in where allegedly done by black youths when he saw another one he looked suspect. That is not racism. That’s profiling.

        Affirmative action discriminates against certain people if it denies one group and accepts another purely based on race alone. That’s discrimination but not racism. That is done because a law said so not because on group or another felt superior to the other. We tend to call it racism since whites more often than any other lose out in this case.

        There are many examples of black on white racism in America. Black3 just hasn’t named one. When he does his homework, and comes up with one, I’ll acknowledge it. Until then he get’s a fat 0 on his test.

        If you have a problem with the law, change it. If you have a problem with a entitlement program eliminate it. But it’s impossible to blame the people that take advantage of it. Don’t blame a person for receiving free lunch or food stamps if a program is created to do so. Everyone isn’t correct morally. The problem is the benefactor not the beneficiary. They don’t call our government Uncle Sugar for nothing.

        We all know that Black will do anything to “win” an argument. He’s gone into unfamiliar territory and as usual wants to change the issue to fit his agenda. But in changing it this time, he’s told untruths about me. I’ll borrow one of his arguments about changing the meaning of words and that’s what he’s doing here. Saying “If I had a son, he’d look like Trayvon” does not a racist make. Appearing on stage in “blackface” is not racist. Racism is a behavior. I once had a supervisor that told me that he speaks to me as if I were a white man. That’s racist. He feel whites are superior to blacks.He also said Danny was a nigger. Danny was a slacker that lied about appointment, attracted to underage girls, and frequently missed work. Danny just happened to be black. Was his description of Danny correct? Absolutely.

        You must understand the term to use it correctly. Many instances of racism, probably most of them, aren’t so. Most are some type of prejudiced or discrimination. If a white guy said he preferred that his daughter married her own race, that’s not racism. If he said no other races are good enough for his daughter, that is.

        Ding Ding. Class dismissed.

        • You don’t think that Sharpton and Jackson practice racism? How about the beatdown of the two Virginian Pilot reporters that I posted about? What about no white members of the Congressional Black Caucus? How about the black nationalist (separatist) movements of Malcolm X and Louis Farrakhan? Jeremiah Wright?

          How about this by Jill Scott, a three time Grammy winner and actress from 2010:

          You know the moment when you realize that fine, accomplished brother is with a White woman? Let’s call it “the wince.” Three-time Grammy Award-winning artist, writer, actress, philanthropist, mother and all-around Renaissance woman, Jill Scott gets to the root of our feelings on the matter in the April issue of ESSENCE… My new friend is handsome, African-American, intelligent and seemingly wealthy. He is an athlete, loves his momma, and is happily married to a White woman. I admit when I saw his wedding ring, I privately hoped. But something in me just knew he didn’t marry a sister. Although my guess hit the mark, when my friend told me his wife was indeed Caucasian, I felt my spirit…wince. I didn’t immediately understand it. My face read happy for you. My body showed no reaction to my inner pinch, but the sting was there, quiet like a mosquito under a summer dress. Was I jealous? Did the reality of his relationship somehow diminish his soul’s credibility? The answer is not simple. One could easily dispel the wince as racist or separatist, but that’s not how I was brought up.

          She says it isn’t racist and spends the rest of the column using phrases that define it as racism. If a white person said the same, it would be quickly defined as such.

          You are a rational man but you are wrong about evidence of black on white racism.

          • Utah,

            I took about half my sociology classes on race relations. I do know this issue. As with everything dealing with matters of race, WM denies that I can know anything about the issue. He is doing it here. You have also noted another example of this:

            She says it isn’t racist and spends the rest of the column using phrases that define it as racism. If a white person said the same, it would be quickly defined as such.

            My professors repeatedly taught that whites cannot understand racism, and that blacks cannot be racist — even my white professors. So, me being me, I asked each of my white professors who said this why they were teaching the class (never got an answer, always got a 0 for class participation – but ALWAYS A’s on my papers)

            This fallacious belief that blacks are the only ones that can define racism and that they cannot be racist has been institutionalized in the black community (as well as the race baiting industry). I do not necessarily fault WM for falling for it, he grew up in and lives in this culture. I fault him because I know he is smarter than to fall for this. But, as he just proved, he refuses to see the contradictions in his own words. This is why he can say the words “There is racism on all sides,” but he will never see an example of it. Instead, he will point to anecdotal accounts of individual prejudice and tell you THAT is racism – like his football example. That is not racism, it is as I described, prejudice, bigotry, etc. This is why Archie Bunker was called a bigot at the time the show was on the air, not a racist: because, back then, when we had officially sanctioned racism, people knew and understood what ‘real’ racism is – and thinking a white boy can’t cover you is NOT racism.

            As long as this remains the way things are in this nation, things will not get better, they will get worse — period! And there are people doing everything they can to prevent any improvement because their livelihood and political power depend on making things worse.

          • Show me where I said that. My first statement was what? “There is racism on both sides.”

            Stop defending and read what I’m saying. Jeeze guys take your guards down.

          • Sharpton and Jackson scream racism in order to get paid. Huey Newton and Malcolm Little, yes. They said the white man was the blue eyed devil. Racists for sure. Louis Farrakhan said he is and I just know Rev Wright has made racists statements.

            CBC forbid a white representative from Tennessee from joining, even though his districts where predominately black. Absolutely discrimination based on racism. Whites would be crucified if they had done this.

            My sister asked me when was I going to date a black woman. I asked her where was I going to meet one at? Not at work. Not where I live. Not in the places I frequent. The black women I see in those places are generally married. I wasn’t going to go out of my way to date a “black woman”. I date whomever I’m attracted to and that will have me.

            Black women feel abandoned by black men and we’ve given them good reasons to feel that way. We leave them knocked up while we’re locked up. We cheat often and woefully under achieve in many cases. We have bad credit cause we don’t pay our bills on time. We don’t take care of our kids. We abandon our sons. We really, in many cases, just don’t do the right thing.

            But I’ll assure you Utah, I’m not wrong about the evidence. I just said that Black hasn’t presented any. A statement made doesn’t constitute a behavior. How would you like to be judged by one or 2 statements that you’ve made in your life.

            Kanye West was wrong about GWB. He had no basis for saying what he did. Kanye was also right when he said, ”

            “So stick by his side
            I know this dude’s balling and yea that’s nice
            But they gonna keep callin and tryin
            But u stay right girl
            and when he gets on
            He’ll leave your ass for a white girl”

            That happens alot. Mainly because it was forbidden for so long. Now we see similarities and similar interest. Money the main one.

            PS….Obama said Kanye was a jackass. But he’ll apologize if Kanye votes for him I’m sure.

        • There is racism on both sides. There is racism within races. I’ve said many times but Black ignores that to try and make his point. So by him saying that I’ve never acknowledged anything in the other direction, makes him a liar.

          Sorry, no, it does not. I have said that you have never acknowledged an incident of racism from blacks toward whites since I have known you. As with everything I’ve encountered with you on this subject, you ignore my words. You see and hear only what you want, and I have come to believe it is because you have been indoctrinated to do so as you are generally reasonable on every other subject but this one.

          Because he is pointing out instances that he feels is racist and I don’t agree that they are, he thinks that’s denial the blacks can be racist.

          This is a case in point. The examples you point out (i.e. Jim Crow) fall squarely within the definition I have given you and others of racism, yet you ignore this and treat me as though I never said this. That makes you a denier, but it does not make me either a liar, nor ignorant of the issue.

          Nothing is further from the truth and I’ve given many examples. Yes, black3, I’m putting you on blast.

          Again, your examples fall squarely into my definition of racism, yet you are – here again – telling me that my definition is different from yours. I will admit, your ACTIONS prove another of my assertions: that blacks believe only THEY can define racism. I reject this as definitionally racist in itself (another point you ignore).

          I’ve said many of the lighter skinned blacks feel superior to the darker skinned ones. That’s RACISM within what is referred to as sub-races.

          That’s PREJUDICE, BIGOTRY, BIAS – it is NOT racism – by your own definition, WM – unless you are arguing this is on the level of Jim Crowe.

          I once wrote about playing wide receiver on my football team. A white kid lined up to cover me and I instantly thought, “there’s no way this white boy can cover me.” I thought I was a superior athlete because I was black and he was white. Guess what that is Black:

          Nope, that is PREJUDICE, BIGOTRY, BIAS, but it is not racism.

          Honkey describes the white guys that came to the black parts of town to pick up black prostitutes. They would drive to a point that they felt safe and then honked their horns. Did u know that black?

          Nice red herring, and yes, I did (I have told you many times, I focused on race relations in my sociology degree).

          What he did was PROFILE a person according to a certain group of attributes and race was one of them. That doesn’t make a person racist.

          Profiling is done by every human every day of their lives. When it is used to control the behavior of otherwise rational people — but when it is done based on color of skin and made official govt. policy – THAT is racism. Now, has the govt. or has the govt. NOT said the police can’t profile based on skin color, or other law enforcement can’t profile? THEY HAVE! And there is a prime example of my point – official, govt. sanctioned racism in favor of blacks – that YOU IGNORE! WM, that means you just lost your argument as it is a clear example that cannot be denied and which you have ignored (actually, it means I win my argument AND my complaint against you – not that you will acknowledge it here anymore than you ever have).

          Affirmative action discriminates against certain people if it denies one group and accepts another purely based on race alone. That’s discrimination but not racism.

          BLATANT CONTRADICTION! Affirmative action is based solely on race, and that meets the definition in every sense of the word – YOURS and mine. IT IS RACIST BY DEFINITION!!! You contradict yourself – again – and deny another clear example of govt. sponsored racism. Again, you prove my argument on this issue and my complaint against you. You are being irrational on this issue – PERIOD!

          That is done because a law said so not because on group or another felt superior to the other.

          So stop using Jim Crowe as an example of racism, it was done because the law said so.

          There are many examples of black on white racism in America. Black3 just hasn’t named one.

          YOU just named several, but because YOU believe only blacks can define racism, you ONLY see it against blacks. You have destroyed yourself here, WM.

          We all know that Black will do anything to “win” an argument. He’s gone into unfamiliar territory and as usual wants to change the issue to fit his agenda. But in changing it this time, he’s told untruths about me.

          Hey, WM, I hold a degree that deals specifically with this subject, do you? No? So your only claim to be an ‘expert’ is the color of your skin? THAT, WM, is racism. It also proves my point: you think no one but a black can define racism.

          I’ll borrow one of his arguments about changing the meaning of words and that’s what he’s doing here.

          No, actually, I have not – but you have.

          You must understand the term to use it correctly.

          I rest my case against you, WM.

          • Definition of RACISM

            1: a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race

            I wrote: ““there’s no way this white boy can cover me.” I thought I was a superior athlete because I was black and he was white.”

            Blinking….

            • Pay attention to #2

              rac·ism
                 
              noun

              1.a belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human races determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one’s own race is superior and has the right to rule others.

              2.a policy, system of government, etc., based upon or fostering such a doctrine; discrimination.

              3.hatred or intolerance of another race or other races.

              Pay attention to #2c

              Definition of PREJUDICE

              1: injury or damage resulting from some judgment or action of another in disregard of one’s rights; especially : detriment to one’s legal rights or claims

              2a (1) : preconceived judgment or opinion (2) : an adverse opinion or leaning formed without just grounds or before sufficient knowledge b : an instance of such judgment or opinion c : an irrational attitude of hostility directed against an individual, a group, a race, or their supposed characteristics

              Definition of BIGOT

              : a person who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices; especially : one who regards or treats the members of a group (as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance

              Now, back to what I said here and have always said to you – and to what you deny:

              Now, if this is the definition you assign to the term ‘racism,’ this discussion is over: this defines something that is most often an inherent character trait of an individual, and we can neither legislate it, nor lay a moral claim to have the authority to legislate it. It would be like trying to control who someone hates and punishing them accordingly, or to legislate what someone believes about anything. In fact, if we get right down to it, the right to be racist in this sense is protected by the first amendment as it is a matter of free will and/or conscience.

              This would confine this definition to the individual, and I have always considered racism – real racism – to be a matter of officially sanctioned policy: either by a society at large or through its government. For this reason, I have always preferred to think of racism in the sense of the dictionary definition above as prejudice or bigotry, and I have always considered racism to include some form of official policy that applies to all of society. This is the form of racism this nation struggled with over both the issue of slavery as well as civil rights after the Civil War, and this is the definition I use when discussing the term.

              By clinging only to the definition you have chosen, you affirm my argument: you are using race to bash individuals and to provide grounds to ‘justify’ using the govt. against an entire race in the name of ‘justice’ – otherwise known as racism. You just do not see the logical extension here because you are refusing to do what you tell me to do: stop defending and start listening. If you were to do that, you would see I am using a definition that does not condemn the individual as racist, but focuses on a society and/or govt. policy instead. Your definition is weak, mine is strong.

              Using your definition, where affirmative action is not racism, it is just the law, slavery could not be condemned as racism, nor Jim Crowe laws as they were ‘just the law.’

              • Done. I won’t continue with this with you. You’ve lied and there’s no coming back from it. By lying, in plain terms means that you’ve told other people that I haven’t said things that I know and you know I have. Post about it all you want. Declare yourself the winner. But by lying, I’ve lost respect for you. Period.

                • WM,

                  I have not lied. In fact, you came on here, affirmed my claims and then denied that you affirmed them in the face of the examples I provided.

                  Get hacked off at me all you want, I have not had to lie – I have all the ammunition I need to make my case in your won words. After all, you are the one who has said discrimination is not racism if it is legal, then claimed that Jim Crowe laws were an example of racism. If you can’t see the contradiction there, you prove my point. And if you deny that affirmative action is racism after admitting it prefers one race over another, then you affirm my accusation against you as to trying to claim only blacks can define racism AND that you have NEVER acknowledged a single example of racism.

                  I realize you think other wise, but had this exchange occurred in a formal debate, scored by the rules of reason, you would have lost while having never laid a glove on me because you have ignored what I have been saying while I HAVE addressed your points – every one of them.

                  Still, believe it or not, I am glad you made your case for yourself.

              • PS….again you’re wrong. I thought God made blacks better athletes than whites. There was no white athlete could do anything better than a black athlete. That’s what I thought. Whites didn’t have skill set of physical attributes. We were superior.

                Racist thinking is called what?

                • You call it racism, but it falls squarely in the definition of prejudice and bigotry. So tell me how I can be wrong unless YOU claim special dispensation in defining terms?

                  Once again, you prove my arguments. You do it every time you ignore what i am actually saying to you.

          • “Hey, WM, I hold a degree that deals specifically with this subject, do you?”

            Hmmm…..I remember reading somewhere that you said your degree was worthless?

            I never claimed to be an expert on anything. I called you a liar and I will stick with that. I stand by my post as written.

            • It generally is, but that does not mean I didn’t get an education in the process – which I did. But you told me I have no qualifications on this subject, and ‘the world’ says I do. I offered it in both lights: that ‘the world’ acknowledges my credentials, and I actually used my time in college to learn and understand what was going on.

              And you have not shown me to be a liar. I have defended every one of my claims and have remained perfectly consistent. Your blinders are preventing you from seeing this.

              You reminded me about my words concerning degrees, now let me remind you that you have said I am one of the most consistent people you know. You just think I am inconsistent on this issue. That is possible, but then, you have never – NOT ONCE – considered that I am just as consistent here as with all other issues and that you are exactly as I claim: blinded by the issue. After all, I have acknowledged the definition of racism you have used by example with things like Jim Crowe, but you also want to include so many other things that I object to and have explained why. This is exactly what I have been saying: you think you are the only one who can define the term. And when you point to the dictionary, you leave out the whole definition. Otherwise, you would see I am on firm ground in what I am saying.

              One more thing: most of my position on this issue was heavily influenced by black philosophers and social commentators. Walter Williams and Thomas Sowell among them, but also Bill Cosby and several other prominent blacks have had a strong influence in guiding my understanding of this issue because I realized early on that those in the industry (Jackson, Sharpton, Obama) are only grinding an agenda stone.

  4. There is real racism on both sides, I don’t think that B and I mean to imply otherwise – but the modern answer to racism is more racism. We try to put programs in place to advantage one over the other based on skin color and that just serves to increase the levels of conflict. It is especially difficult in poor economic times when the recipients of these government benefits, take to the streets to protest for more when the majority who pay for it is shrinking. It is simple math to understand why most who object to this are white – roughly 72% of Americans self identify as “white”, 13% as “black” or “African-American”. That’s not racism, it is just math.

    I don’t have a frame of reference for the”black” experience – I’m not black – but I escaped the same poverty of rural north Mississippi that afflicted many of my black friends when they didn’t. I went to public school with black kids who got free breakfasts, free lunches, they went to Head Start and after school programs. I went to college during the late 70’s and early 80’s when racial preferences in admissions were not questioned and there were specific scholarships based on racial preference. I had none of that, we qualified but my parents didn’t believe in welfare. We did with what we had – I didn’t have every nice thing that my friends had but never went hungry.

    I had a black Western Civilization professor who hated the western world, railed against Euro-centric colonialism and imperialism and American unfairness and never got the irony that he was teaching at a major university and saying things that would have sent him to jail in his own country.

    I made it out. My family at one point was likely as poor as any black family in Union County. What was the difference? I had a mom and dad who taught me to work hard and expected me to do it. I worked as a kid while many of my black friends were either standing on a street corner doing nothing, getting into alcohol and/or drugs and running wild because there was no dad in the house. I had a black friend who had 5 siblings, all with different fathers and he didn’t even know who his dad was.

    But you know what? I have lazy assed white friends who followed exactly the same path to exactly the same end – perpetual poverty on the government dole, drug addiction and jail – so there is an element of personal choice involved here as well. According to many sources, whites pull in more welfare dollars than blacks (given the racial demographics, that is yet another mathematical certainty).

    Have any of our dollars spent since the Civil Rights Act passed in 1964 served to eliminate racism? No they haven’t. To a large extent, these programs were just payola to keep the black community quiet and buy votes for Democrats. What has changed is our culture to be more accepting of different races. Interracial marriages are common, we have a bi-racial president, and yet we are told that racism is still rampant.

    Think maybe the “cure” for racism was worse than the disease?

    I don’t have the answer other than to say that I believe that curing racism with more racism is an impossibility.

    Do we as humans discriminate (in the sense that discriminate means “to make a choice”)? Yes, we do. There are people with whom I choose not to associate – but that has nothing to do with race, they are just dicks. Statistically, there are more “white” people in that category than “blacks”. We all make choices – given my personal politics and beliefs, there are people with which I will never agree and will never associate with – and some of those people are black, most white – but this has more to do with the white leftists and the black establishment’s embrace of “progressive” ideology, not any individual animosity. I respect many black Americans, they just happen to be conservative and classical liberal black Americans.

    How many conservative and classical liberal black Americans are called “Uncle Tom” by the black establishment? Clarence Thomas, Walter Williams, Ward Connerly, and many others have been called “traitors to their race” for their political views. Remember when Condoleezza Rice was called Bush’s “house nigger” by liberal editorial cartoonist, Ted Rall (a white guy) and he meant it as support for blacks?

    While that brand has been damaged in the Age of Obama by crying “racist” where racism doesn’t exist, something tells me that racism will live as long as it has political value for “progressives” and provides power for purported “spokesman” for black America. This isn’t about race for them, it might have been at one time but not any longer. Today, it is perpetuation of class division and class struggle to promote a particular political ideology “progressivism”/Marxism.

    Until we live up to Dr. King’s admonition to judge a man not by the color of his skin but the content of his character, racism will always be with us. Racism is an evil and illegitimate belief regardless of where it comes from and yes, black people can be racists.

    • I was born a poor Black child, but my parents made me work my ass off and if I was bad, they’d slap the Black off’n me. Thanks to their and my hard work, I’m now a successful White guy.

      Racism as defined in any dictionary is always going to be with us. It’s part of our DNA regardless of race or ethnicity. It started out as a survival mechanism, I guess, but over the centuries, man has , for the most part, managed to quash or suppress that part of our brain that says…hey, that person is different, they don’t belong. Subconsciously though, we still view people different from us in a suspicious manner, at least until we get to know them.

      And if you think about it, White people are even suspicious of other White people. Think not? Try moving from the suburbs of a big city to a small rural mountain community and see the looks you get. 😉

    • What many call racism today is actually the result of cultural – not racism. Your comments do a good job of accurately and honestly pointing this out without actually naming it directly. Well done.

    • I agree with everything that you’ve said here. There’s enough racism to go around for everyone. Your post is one that I can respect as you are speaking from what you’ve experienced and not told what you’re supposed to think.

      Hopefully at some point there will be more of a respect and acceptance of different opinions here and that will improve the chances of this site growing more than it already has. But like cracker49 said, you guys tend to talk down to people here so they tend to post less.

      I know my points are valid, if at anytime anyone wants to question any of it, I can back it up.

      But answer me something, who the hell said black people can’t be racists? Let me guess. Black3?

  5. I think that there is truth in the old bromide, “a person is smart but people are stupid”. It could easily apply to race relations because it is much harder to form generalizations on an individual level. So much of what we call racism is group to group division – that’s another trick of Marxists, to separate people in to cliques to play off against each other.

    People are racist, a person is not.

    • Good point. I had intentionally avoided addressing the connection between race relations and Marxism in America – but that is just as real..and possibly even more dangerous.

  6. Thanks you guys. This has been fun. But frankly, this is the very reason why I didn’t sing up before to post here. The closed mindset. The attack on anyone that doesn’t agree fully with with others do. It’s fine. It’s Mike’s blog. I’m glad he gave me the opportunity to post here. Even though I wish he would have read my post with an open mind and not so defensively.

    Black, keep on preaching. You have no idea how I live. Stop trying to comment on things that you don’t know.

    Like I said before, quit telling black people how to think and what they think. A person is a product of their environment in most cases. Watch the movie Trading Places.

    You guys and believe what you want and I’ll believe what I do.I’ll repeat it again, there’s racism on both sides. It’s just not everytime Shapton shouts it and it definitely isn’t everytime Black shouts it.

    Again, I’ll leave guys as you were so you can preach to your own choirs in peace.

    • I’m not telling you what to think, I’m asking you to think. We can’t know or speak our opinions about black America because we are white? Is that it?

      I’ve challeged you with examples, you have given little to work with other than opinion.

      I actually agree with many of your points but if you aren’t willing to hear other opinions, then I can’t force you any more than I can tell you what to think.

      Funny thing…I never knew you were a black man till this past week…and I didn’t care – still don’t.

      • Sure you can. What I’m saying is all black don’t agree with the people you guys always refer to as “black leaders”. Few do.

        Also, I addressed your challenges in an above reply.

      • No offense, M., but that is a bit of a condescendimg comment: “I’m asking you to think.”

        I thought Wills gave a great argument, and he’s coming from a completely different angle. Apparentely, it escaped you silly boys that he pointed out racism on both sides.

        • Absolutely right on kells. The real problem with this blog is the “I”m right, you’re WRONG!”, “I’m trying to “teach” you something.”, and now, “I’m asking you to think.” Utah – Do you actually believe the wmgates and others here have not “thought” about their responses, their lives, or their belief systems?

          • Gee. I never knew having an opinion offended so many people. If I really wanted to do what you guys allege, I would simply turn the comments off and just write away.

            I’m being challenged to think about things differently, all I am asking is for the same courtesy in return. As far as everyone thinking that they are right – if we don’t, then what is the point of even posting anything if we don’t? These exchanges are exactly what should happen on every point – if they did, more people would learn, including me. We aren’t monolithic – I generally agree with most but Black3 and I have had some pretty stiff disagreements on these pages.

            And William – I don’t purport to choose black leaders and I have never generalized racism to the black community but it is without controversy that these people whom I have noted ARE black and have and still do commit acts that would be called racist if a white person…and they ARE put forth as leaders because they do have a following. That is a fact…but I also recognize that doesn’t condemn a larger segment of black America any more than one dumb ass racist white guy does the entirety of the Tea Party movement.

            And asking “what about?” isn’t a diversion, it is a question…an inquiry.

            The fact that we are even having this discussion indicates that the invitation to differ is there…just don’t expect it not to be challenged. I expect what I write to be. If it isn’t, it is sort of pointless.

            • “that these people whom I have noted ARE black and have and still do commit acts that would be called racist if a white person”

              That’s one of my points. Many blacks don’t know what racism is and yell it at a moments notice. That doesn’t make it so. If they do it , and it is wrong, how is it right if you do it in return? Yell racism absolutely when it it, but ignore the screams of it when it’s not. Our real black leaders really need to do a better job of telling these fools to shut up but them they’ll scream they’re being censored.

              “And asking “what about?” isn’t a diversion, it is a question…an inquiry.”

              Not answering a question but addressing it with another question is absolutely a diversion. If I say “Well what about Bill Clinton being unfaithful then you say “Well what about claims that MLK was….” thats a diversion.

              “The fact that we are even having this discussion indicates that the invitation to differ is there…just don’t expect it not to be challenged”

              I totally expect things to be challenged. Attacking is mainly what goes on and it sours people on even writing. Did you see black say he agreed with ANYTHING I said? Only he shared your comment. That’s it. That’s not anyone that’s open to debate. Hell, I’ll take a challenge and say that black3 doesn’t know half of what I’ve studied on this topic. He may say he does, And whether he does or not isn’t relevant. I know the extent of my knowledge on the subject and much of it you can’t receive through mainstream curriculum. It goes much deeper. A publisher determines what goes in a text book. It doesn’t mean it’s always correct or if some things are distorted of left out intentionally.

              Thanks for the invite. Don’t know how much I’ll continue. But even the sun shines on a dogs ass every now and then. The white version of that is “Even a broken clock is right twice a day”.

        • Kells, they think I’m attacking so they’re defending. It’s not the case. It’s common when one sides make a point then the other side says, “Well what about…” That’s not directly addressing the point. It’s defense by playing offensive.

          It’s a touchy subject which many people care not to discuss. I don’t have a problem with it. We’re getting disconnects on definitions, that are in one case, being intentionally distorted. Mike presents a rational case of discussion. Black wants to tell you how it is by how he sees it. No other way is possible. But that’s BS. He knows it.

          Dislike of a box Chevy sitting on 22″ rims and the driver having dreads and gold teeth is no more racist than dislike for a F-150 with a lift kit on mudders with a rebel flag license plate. The driver may have a dip in his lip and a fishing hook on his cap. That’s cultural bias. But that black kid in that car will probably say that you’re racist if you say you don’t like it. He doesn’t know any better. That’s what he’s been taught so he repeats it. Racism is a behavior.

          That’s what I’m trying to tell Black. Everything Sharpton says is racist, isn’t. He just throws it out there because that’s what he does. All the people that follow him do just that—follow. If they took a minute a thought they would see it but they won’t because of the goal they’re trying to attain. And they don’t care how they get it. Hell, screaming racism has worked in the past, why not now right?

          • I don’t have a problem with it. We’re getting disconnects on definitions, that are in one case, being intentionally distorted. Mike presents a rational case of discussion. Black wants to tell you how it is by how he sees it. No other way is possible. But that’s BS. He knows it.

            I’m starting to lose my patience with you. First, it is not me who is only looking at part of the dictionary definition here – it’s you. Second, I have tried – many times – to explain why I reject your primary focus of racism on a personal level. I happen to agree with Utah: the person is not racist, people are.

            That brings us to my comments as opposed to Utah’s. Show me where my definitions are in contradiction or disconnect with what Utah has said here. I don’t you can because – as far as I can understand Utah – we’re in agreement. So how is it Utah has a point and I don’t? LOL, simple: you don’t like me. You say it all the time: you claim I am dogmatic, yet you have made a habit of ignoring my history of changing my positions and even issuing apologies when I realize I am wrong.

            In fact, that seems to be a common trait among those guilty of the 180 degree rule (Kells, feel free to lump yourself into this group). Also, you think my tone is rude, crude and abrasive. Fine, think what you’d like, but you, WM, have been told I am not that way in person (and you, Kells, know it to be true from first hand experience). So how is it I shouldn’t feel a bit of personal animosity here? 🙂

            That’s what I’m trying to tell Black. Everything Sharpton says is racist, isn’t. He just throws it out there because that’s what he does. All the people that follow him do just that—follow. If they took a minute a thought they would see it but they won’t because of the goal they’re trying to attain. And they don’t care how they get it. Hell, screaming racism has worked in the past, why not now right?

            *sigh* I have acknowledged this point. The real disconnect here is that you refuse to see that, when the govt. accepts arguments like Sharpton’s and then makes it official U.S. govt. policy/law to discriminate against whites as a result (supposedly in the name of ‘justice’), then THAT IS REAL RACISM! But you refuse to see it, even though it is right out there for you to see.

            But not to worry, I missed it to – for a long time. Hence the title of my post “How Did I Miss This?”

      • I’m not telling you what to think, I’m asking you to think. We can’t know or speak our opinions about black America because we are white? Is that it?

        I’ve challeged you with examples, you have given little to work with other than opinion.

        I actually agree with many of your points but if you aren’t willing to hear other opinions, then I can’t force you any more than I can tell you what to think.

        ^ What he said.

        • Are you questioning me?!?! He did, indeed, project condescension. (At least in my mind.)

          That said, I shall be over there shortly to finish up my job with him. (He will not be pleased………..however; he is a rather sick and twisted individual so perhaps he will!)

  7. This thread pretty much summarizes how I feel about issue. It’s pretty straight forward so hopefully people can understand better my consistency and how I feel about certain issues (hopefully red won’t mind):

    GOP is White Republicans? Okay, no wonder the Congressional Black Caucus has ostracized West & Scott. Oh, that’s Allen West from Florida & Tim Scott from South Carolina.

    -redroses

    The CBC is a discriminatory group the pretends to allow members of any race but when they try to join they find a reason to deny them membership. Consistent with most agencies of this type, they lose the original focus of equality to focus on preferential.—wmgates

    Who comprises the NAACP?

    -redroses

    NAACP is open for members of all races. It was originally comprised of most white executive officers with the intent to eliminate racial prejudice or discrimination with it’s focus on blacks and women. The first president, Moorfield Storey, was a white lawyer and one of it’s most prominent members was Albert Einstein.—wmgates

    Why can a black woman win Miss America but no Caucasian can enter the Miss Black America pageant?

    -redroses

    Black women originally were excluded from competing in the Miss America contest. So in the late ’60’s that MBA contest was created. I’m not sure if it’s open to whites, or other races, it may not be. If not, it should be in my opinion. If it garners any interest from other races they definitely should be allowed to participate.—wmgates

    How many Caucasian students get scholarships from the Unite Negro College Fund?

    -redroses

    I don’t know of a number to answer that but I do know that it’s advertised that anybody can apply. I also know that a branch that provides 1000 scholarships a year is sponsored by Bill and Melinda Gates. A person has to be a US citizen of legal resident to apply. I think their primary focus is on minorities in this branch, though. I also know that the COB of the UNCF is white though is that means anything—wmgates.

    Or, gregcobb, are you going to tell me that the Congressional Black Caucus, NAACP, Miss Black America & United Negro College Fund are all part of reparations?

    -redroses

    I’ll let Greg respond to that since I’m not sure if the NAACP or UNCF receive operational taxpayer funds. I know the MBA pageant doesn’t. I don’t think the CBC does nor the Democratic Congressional Hispanic Caucus or the Republican Congressional Hispanic Caucus. Other than their paychecks.—-wmgates

    My first statement said what about the CBC?

    • And so the truth comes out! You’ve been seeing Red on the side!!! Oh, the pain! (Now I’m seeing red!) Well, then; I hope your betrayal is rewarded by her thorns! (Only Buggerthat knows of that so I shall keep my piehole shut and let Red tell you all about the unscrupulous details.)

  8. The only racism that matters, to me anyway, is when prejudice is coupled with power.. there can be a silent conspiracy among companies to Not hire blacks, or to not hire the elderly, such a racket is hard to prove, and harder to fight. That is why we have quotas, because a man cannot be counted on to be completely neutral on race.
    One can make the case that such a practice is un-American, and I say that hiring by color is not American, unless one is casting a movie.
    Situations like this are why we need a Supreme Court.

    BTW Utah, your long reply was worthy of being a blog by itself.

  9. Wm, I did not see red’s question before replying. I have no idea why she asked me that question, nor why it was asked in such a manner.
    I am not in favor of reparations; if I were, the Indians would be 1st in line.

Talk Amongst Yourselves:

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.